This gross bitch actually said “anti-whiteness is not anti-white.”

This shit just keeps getting goofier.

The Telegraph:

A Church of England archdeacon has called for “anti-whiteness”, in comments which have been criticised as divisive.

The Ven Miranda Threlfall-Holmes, Archdeacon of Liverpool, also called for people to “smash the patriarchy” but insisted her comments were “not anti-white, or anti-men”.

Her statement prompted an angry reaction, with one person asking if it would be “safe to attend church” if Dr Threlfall-Holmes “holds racial prejudice against white people”.

Just weeks ago, the church announced it would be hiring a “deconstructing whiteness” officer as part of a new 11-person “racial justice unit” being set up by the Diocese of Birmingham.

Senior clergy have also faced criticism for calling for the church’s £100 million slavery reparations fund to be increased to £1 billion.

Dr Threlfall-Holmes wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “I went to a conference on whiteness last autumn. It was very good, very interesting and made me realise: whiteness is to race as patriarchy is to gender.

“So yes, let’s have anti-whiteness, and let’s smash the patriarchy. That’s not anti-white, or anti-men, it’s anti-oppression.”

In response, users of X suggested that if the Cambridge-educated priest wanted “anti-whiteness” then she should “lead by example and resign”.

…

Her words were criticised as “divisive” and “nonsensical” and one user said it would appear she had “given up Christianity to join a new and sinister cult”.

I went to a conference on whiteness last autumn. It was very good, very interesting and made me realise: whiteness is to race as patriarchy is to gender.
So yes, let’s have anti whiteness, & let’s smash the patriarchy.
That’s not anti-white, or anti-men, it’s anti-oppression.

— Miranda Threlfall-Holmes (@MirandaTHolmes) March 21, 2024

Dr Threlfall-Holmes, who was appointed archdeacon last year, also holds a role advising church leaders on implanting safeguarding reforms.

Last October she revealed she was attending a conference on “waking up to and addressing whiteness in the Anglican church”.

The day-long “Racial Justice Conference” in Birmingham was organised by Reconciliation Initiatives, a charity working in partnership with Coventry Cathedral to help churches “contribute to reconciliation in wider society”.

The aims of the conference included: “To encourage white participants to take next steps in facing their own whiteness, and in addressing institutional racism within Anglican churches and provinces.”

The charity also runs a four-week “Being White” course aimed at clergy and lay members who “identify racially as white” to help them address “the ways we are caught up in a system of white superiority and white advantage in UK society”.

This is not about brown people or even really about whites. It’s about destroying Christianity, making it even more of a joke.

It is maybe about hurting white people, but everyone is already doing this same bit in the media and all over the place. No one is going to take this woman seriously, what they are going to do is take the church even less seriously.

Very excited to be contacted by a local vaccination centre asking for my and other keyworkers contact details in case there is spare vaccine at the end of a day after no-shows etc. Would be great to have the vaccine! I’ve barely left the house for 9 months!

— Miranda Threlfall-Holmes (@MirandaTHolmes) January 13, 2021

You got a dog in this fight, UN?

The Guardian:

Women’s rights have been “taken hostage” at the UN, and hard-fought gains are being eroded around the world, a group of former UN leaders has warned.

The group has called for the urgent implementation of a rule to put a woman at the helm of the general assembly every other year, to combat a growing hostility to gender equality. It comes after the UN secretary general, António Guterres, pointed out at the UN’s 78th general assembly, in New York last month, that it remained an almost all-male event. “Just four women signed our founding document,” he said. “One look around this room shows not enough has changed. ‘We the people’ does not mean ‘we the men’.”

GWL Voices – an advocacy group set up by Irina Bokova, a former director general of Unesco, Helen Clark, the former prime minister of New Zealand, and Susana Malcorra, who was a chief of staff to Ban Ki-moon as UN secretary general – is also insistent that the UN must elect its first female secretary general at the next vote in 2026. Of the 78 presidents elected since 1946, four have been women; there has never been a woman UN secretary general.

The movement hopes to use the momentum of the session to push for change, arguing that the lack of gender equality at the heart of the organisation is having a chilling effect on progress for women and girls around the world.

By the way, I’m still pronouncing it “the un.” Not because that joke was in that movie Idiocracy, but because I thought it was funny on my own independently of that movie.

Irina Bokova, Helen Clark, and Susana Malcorra

I hadn’t ever thought that the patriacrhy would be using cancer to wipe out women, but it’s very obvious not that the Guardian has brought it to my attention.

The Guardian:

Health experts are calling for a “feminist approach” to cancer to eliminate inequalities, as research reveals 800,000 women worldwide are dying needlessly every year because they are denied optimal care.

Cancer is one of the biggest killers of women and ranks in their top three causes of premature deaths in almost every country on every continent.

But gender inequality and discrimination are reducing women’s opportunities to avoid cancer risks and impeding their ability to get a timely diagnosis and quality care, according to a report published in the Lancet.

The largest report of its kind, which studied women and cancer in 185 countries, found unequal power dynamics across society globally were having “resounding negative impacts” on how women experience cancer prevention and treatment.

There was particular focus on “women’s cancers” – including breast and cervical – despite lung and colorectal cancer being among the top three causes of deaths from the disease, researchers said.

Gender inequalities are also hindering women’s professional advancement as leaders in cancer research, practice and policymaking, which in turn perpetuates the lack of women-centred cancer prevention and care, the report adds.

The commission brought together a multidisciplinary and diverse team from around the globe. It included experts in gender studies, human rights, law, economics, social sciences, cancer epidemiology, prevention, and treatment, as well as patient advocates, to analyse how women around the world experience cancer.

It is calling for a new feminist agenda for cancer care to eliminate gender inequality.

“The impact of a patriarchal society on women’s experiences of cancer has gone largely unrecognised,” said Dr Ophira Ginsburg, a senior adviser for clinical research at the National Cancer Institute’s Centre for Global Health and a co-chair of the commission.

“Globally, women’s health is often focused on reproductive and maternal health, aligned with narrow anti-feminist definitions of women’s value and roles in society, while cancer remains wholly underrepresented.

“Our commission highlights that gender inequalities significantly impact women’s experiences with cancer. To address this, we need cancer to be seen as a priority issue in women’s health, and call for the immediate introduction of a feminist approach to cancer.”

It makes perfect sense that we need a feminist approach to cancer.

We should have a feminist approach to everything.

A “feminist approach” to protests

A “feminist approach” to borders

A “feminist approach” to crime

A “feminist approach” to art

A “feminist approach” to fitness

A “feminist approach” to religion

A “feminist approach” to school

A “feminist approach” to living in a society

A “feminist approach” to pregnancy

A “feminist approach” to motherhood

The Lord’s Prayer is what Jesus told people to pray when asked specifically what they should pray.

Previously, these anti-Christ attacks coming from the Protestants (as well are from certain types of Roman Catholics, quite frankly) have involved weird word games, like “Jesus never even talked about gay sex, so he must have thought it was good.”

Now they’re just openly saying “actually, Jesus was the bad guy and an agent of the patriarchy.”

What is the point of even claiming to be Christian, other than to hurt real Christians?

The Guardian:

The archbishop of York has suggested that opening words of the Lord’s Prayer, recited by Christians all over the world for 2,000 years, may be “problematic” because of their patriarchal association.

In his opening address to a meeting of the Church of England’s ruling body, the General Synod, Stephen Cottrell dwelt on the words “Our Father”, the start of the prayer based on Matthew 6:9–13 and Luke 11:2–4 in the New Testament.

“I know the word ‘father’ is problematic for those whose experience of earthly fathers has been destructive and abusive, and for all of us who have laboured rather too much from an oppressively patriarchal grip on life,” he said.

His comment – a brief aside in a speech that focused on the need for unity – will divide members of the C of E, a body whose differences on issues of sexuality, identity and equality have been highly visible for years.

After Cottrell’s speech, Canon Dr Chris Sugden, chair of the conservative Anglican Mainstream group, pointed out that in the Bible Jesus urged people to pray to “our father”.

He said: “Is the archbishop of York saying Jesus was wrong, or that Jesus was not pastorally aware? It seems to be emblematic of the approach of some church leaders to take their cues from culture rather than scripture.”

Rev Christina Rees, who campaigned for female bishops, said Cottrell had “put his finger on an issue that’s a really live issue for Christians and has been for many years”.

She added: “The big question is, do we really believe that God believes that male human beings bear his image more fully and accurately than women? The answer is absolutely not.”

In February, the C of E said it would consider whether to stop referring to God as “he”, after priests asked to be allowed to use gender-neutral terms instead.

It agreed to launch a commission on gendered language, saying “Christians have recognised since ancient times that God is neither male nor female, yet the variety of ways of addressing and describing God found in scripture has not always been reflected in our worship”.

Obviously, God cannot be male or female, as he is the embodiment of all that exists.

However, humans cannot understand God, and therefore must approach God with a framing that we are capable of grasping, and all throughout history, that framing has involved God as male.

What’s more: he’s definitely not female. Adam was made in the image of God, whereas Eve was made from Adam’s rib.

The real point is: religion is not “Sola Scriptura.” A religion is based on traditions. So even if you believe this idiotic feminist gibberish, you still can’t justify fundamentally altering the nature of the religion.

These people should convert to Judaism or Satanism and leave Christianity alone.

No Christian wants this crap. These are people who are trying to destroy Christianity on purpose.

Here’s the same guy, explaining why anal “marriages” should be blessed

Look, here’s the thing. You can absolutely disagree with my work. But you are not entitled to a personal “debate” in my DMs just because I am a woman who has spent years researching these issues and you are… a man who listens to a lot of podcasts.

— Virginia Sole-Smith (@v_solesmith) April 25, 2023

I almost kind of feel like the point of this material is to fill space on the Ben Shapiro podcast so no one starts asking uncomfortable questions.

You know?

I’ve never actually met anyone who said anything like this.

But I also don’t talk to women.

New York Post:

A weight culture journalist said during an interview Tuesday that fitness-minded people working on a thin body type are “complicit with white supremacy and patriarchy.”

Author Virginia Sole-Smith told NPR’s “Fresh Air” podcast that United States society’s desire to be skinny — and adversity to fatness — can be traced to the end of American slavery as a way of preserving out-of-touch, white beauty standards.

“The thin ideal is definitely a white ideal. When we trace the history of modern diet culture, we really trace it back in the United States to the end of slavery,” Sole-Smith told host Tonya Mosley while promoting her new book, “Fat Talk: Parenting in the Age of Diet Culture.”

Virginia Sole-Smith holding her new book

“Obviously, white supremacy is trying to maintain the power structure. So celebrating a thin white body as the ideal body is a way to ‘other’ and demonize black and brown bodies, bigger bodies, anyone who doesn’t fit into that norm. So this is really about maintaining systems of white supremacy and patriarchy.”

“If you can understand that, actually, by continuing to pursue thinness you are in some level, maintaining your complicity with white supremacy and patriarchy,” she added.

Women, like the Jews, will never stop demanding things.

It’s like bitch, you’re fat. In most places in the country, it’s pretty much a certainty that if I started insulting you in public I’d end up in jail somehow. Either because I’m accused of being a public nuisance, or because some man on the street man attacks me in defense of fat princesses everywhere and then I get charged for attacking him.

Like, I d0n’t have the right to not look at your fat ass. You’ve taken that from me. At what point have you sucked enough blood from society?

Previously: Andrew Tate Prosecution was Organized by the United States Government

The Taliban is right about women.

New York Post:

The Taliban are reportedly worried about the fate of misogynistic influencer Andrew Tate as he faces prosecution in Romania for allegedly trafficking women and forcing them to appear in porn videos.

A former beauty queen who’s been called “Wifey” by Tate claimed that she discussed his arrest and jailing with the Islamic extremists in charge of Afghanistan.

“They are worried about Andrew Tate and they are asking us if he’s free yet,” former Miss New Jersey Sameera Khan tweeted Saturday. “They say westerners need Andrew Tate because we are oppressed by feminists.”

Khan, a self-described “anti-woke journalist,” later posted a warning she got from Twitter that said unidentified “people from Germany” had filed a complaint about her tweet through the Network Enforcement Act.

“This entire website is filled with p—ies,” she complained.

This is why the Taliban needs a seat on the UN Security Council.

We are hosting a Twitter space with the Afghan Taliban to discuss the detainment of Andrew Tate.

They are worried about Andrew Tate and they are asking us if he’s free yet.

They say westerners need Andrew Tate because we are oppressed by feminists.

— Sameera Khan (@SameeraKhan) December 31, 2022

This entire website is filled with p*ssies. pic.twitter.com/vGDUnnlSKn

— Sameera Khan (@SameeraKhan) January 2, 2023

I stand with Andrew Tate. #FreeTopG https://t.co/YAShUpoETP

— Sameera Khan (@SameeraKhan) January 3, 2023

Još jedno brutalno nasilje oca nad ćerkom. Dobio sam informaciju da je u pitanju porodica koja dolazi iz Kine. Podnećemo krivičnu prijavu i protiv ovog monstruma. pic.twitter.com/CrU7g0JcwU

— Igor Jurić (@lojzija) October 28, 2022

Before, I liked Serbia.

But now they are gay faggots telling a man how he can act with his slut progeny?

Who are they?

RT:

Serbian authorities have confirmed that they have arrested a Chinese national who was seen in a shocking video beating his 14-year-old daughter on a tennis court.

The man was apprehended by officers from Palilula police station on the tennis courts at the Banjica sports club.

After being detained for 48 hours, he was brought before Belgrade’s First Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office to face a criminal complaint of domestic violence for which he could jailed between two and 10 years if convicted.

What?

Reports from Serbian media say the man didn’t deny responsibility for the attack. Instead, he tried to explain his conduct was a product of cultural differences.

The father tried to justify his actions by saying his daughter had refused to continue training on a critical day, which is why he wanted her to return to the court.

The man said that he didn’t intend to hurt the girl and believed he had acted correctly, arguing that the behavior was allowed in China, where hierarchy is respected.

He did act correctly and the reason this is allowed in China is that China is a civilized country – unlike Serbia, which is a nation of pussy sniffers (apparently).

After the hearing, an acting deputy requested that the suspect be ordered into custody due to being a flight risk, and also because of the way he had carried out the alleged crime.

The tennis world was shocked by the video, which has been seen by almost two million people.

It shows the man first kicking his daughter and then striking her in the head. When she sits down on a bench, the father drags her to floor by her hair and kicks her in the legs several times.

It’s all Americans complaining about this. That’s why Serbia is acting.

America is a nation of pussy sniffers. All these American faggots do is whiff queef. I’ve never seen anything like it. It’s an army of queef whiffers.

Chinese are civilized people. They don’t have these strange views about the supremacy of vagina.

China will win.

If there’s one thing I know about women, it’s that they’re really good at space travel.

The only reason a space travel company would not have a majority of female employees is patriarchal hatred for the body with the vagina.

The Guardian:

A group of current and former employees at Blue Origin, the space flight company owned by the Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos, has accused the business of operating a work environment that is “rife with sexism” and prefers “breakneck speed” to safety.

An open letter written by Alexandra Abrams, the former head of employee communications at Blue Origin and 20 other current and former workers, says the company’s culture “reflects the worst of the world we live in now” and must change.

Alexandra Abrams

The letter, published on the whistleblower forum Lioness, says: “Workforce gender gaps are common in the space industry, but at Blue Origin they also manifest in a particular brand of sexism. Numerous senior leaders have been known to be consistently inappropriate with women.”

The letter goes on to allege that a senior figure in the organisation was reported a number of times for sexual harassment and that new female employees were warned to stay away from another executive, who had allegedly groped a female colleague. It adds that the workforce was “mostly male” and “overwhelmingly white”.

It’s time for the government to step in and force all companies to have 50% female employees.

In fact, according to the principles of equity, it should be 70% to 90%.

Really, the government should just start incentivizing the abortion of male infants, as the only thing men have ever done in all of human history is hurt women’s feelings on purpose for no reason other than their inferiority complexes.

Men know that women are smarter, faster, and stronger than they are, which is why they began the patriarchy in the first place.

Alexandra Abrams, a former head of employee communications for Blue Origin, is speaking out against the company to @LaurieSegall.

“You cannot create a culture of safety and a culture of fear at the same time. They are incompatible.” pic.twitter.com/JHuFY3cjcs

— CBS Mornings (@CBSMornings) September 30, 2021

Excuse me, it sounds like this company was cleared to fly. I would imagine the safety issues were looked at and taken care of.

— Donna Belitsos (@BelitsosDonna) September 30, 2021

I completely agree, I know several BO interns and a couple full time engineers and this is not the culture they have seen. Almost all of them have worked for other space companies and they prefer the culture at Blue.

— Brett Peloke (@BrettPeloke) October 1, 2021

I’m recent NASA retiree who’s been to BO couple of times, & want them to succeed. But wish could down vote your whiny, facts-free, accusatory post. & for the record, BO is NOT a “successful company” at least not yet. It’s only Major product/contract, BE-4, is far behind schedule.

— davehuntsman (@davehuntsman) September 30, 2021

Last week, I wrote a very good article once again examining the bizarre phenomenon of “right-wing male feminism.” I explained, once again, the bizarre fact that male feminists will not ever present logical arguments or explanations for their revolutionary doctrines, and instead rely purely on the claim that anyone who disagrees with them is a pathetic loser who “can’t get laid.”

In the replies section on The Gamer Uprising, I noted that I made a point in the article not to psychoanalyze male feminists, given that their entire attack strategy is based on psychoanalyzing their opposition.

However, the reality is that male feminists refuse to present any form of an argument in support of their positions, so you are left without any ability to understand what they are trying to communicate beyond the fact that they must be promoting these ideas for personal reasons.

For a period of years, I have asked my feminist critics for an explanation for their belief in the value of women’s liberation, and none of them have ever tried to give an explanation.

A reader wrote:

There really are limits to logical arguments beyond which you have to have a discussion of the Other persons biography. E. Michael Jones has talked about this lately. In his book about the degenerate moderns, he gets into the fact that you don’t go straight for a psycho analysis or biographical ad hominem at the beginning of a debate about an issue. Hear the other person out. Bear with them and give them a chance to show you if they are arguing in good faith, and if their ideas make some kind of basic sense. If so, both you and the other men can probably learn from each other. Jones Gives the example of Thomas Aquinas. As he says, the arguments of Aquinas speak for themselves. There’s nothing wacky or strange that makes you say wait a minute, was this guy some kind of drug addict or looking for a way to justify his desire to do prostitution or pedophilia? No there’s nothing like that present in the writing, so you just take them at their word.

But when you get into a character such as John Paul Sartre or Michael Foucault or some of these people who have these insane points of view that just make no sense coherently, you can argue with them for a bit and eventually you have to go and ask what has your life been like up till now. In the case of Sartre he was a drug addict, something that wasn’t well known until well after his death and which Jones deals with. In the case of Foucault his father was a surgeon who forced his son to be an eyewitness to all kinds of strange surgeries and body dissection’s or something. This massively traumatized little Michelle and goes along way to explaining his future sodomy and career of trying to justify his degeneracy with books of bizarre philosophy.

And so as it turns out ad hominem is a fallacy, and you pointed out that all of the responses to your criticism of feminism always boils down to some form of dismissing what you’re saying with a flimsy accusation of sour grapes or being an InCell. At that point the person is doing an ad hominem fallacy and refusing to confront the argument. But on the other hand if one person in the debate is trying in good faith to dwell on the facts, but the other person keeps ignoring what’s being said or moving the goalposts, it’s absolutely necessary to stop the argument and ask what is going on in the other guys mind and what might’ve happened to him to make him so infantile. This is a perfect explanation of what goes on in almost every political debate in our era if someone in the conversation is making traditional arguments. The arguments will just be dismissed on a very silly level as coming from the person’s childhood or something, and it turns out this is actually just a projection of what the liberal wishes to do with adult conversations. It’s a valid explanation of their procedure and they projected on any adult they encounter, never realizing that the other person was charitably assuming that the person had a real argument to make but was actually a child disguised in an adult body

I replied:

It’s a strange thing, because they (many of my critics or ideological opponents) will always go straight for the psychoanalysis, and the instinct then is to avoid doing that, but when they literally give you nothing you are able to attach to and reply to, but just keep on going – usually it turns into a circle, as I pointed out recently with the guy who believes in the virus/vaccine and says I’m a conspiracy theorist for “thinking everyone in the government is bad” – you just don’t really have anything left but to say “this person must have some personal problem.”

In some cases of course, the person is just stupid and doesn’t understand the basic concept of argument/debate. But if a person is going on and on, and then is clearly being purposefully dishonest – usually by pretending to have forgotten your argument, and then starting over again at the beginning – you can only conclude that there is some other motive.

On the internet, we do know that the government and various Jewish groups literally pay people to go around spreading bullshit on purpose. We know that as a matter of fact, and their budgets are not getting smaller. There are also people on the internet just trolling, having fun trying to get a rise out of people. And of course you don’t know. So it’s a little bit different. But if there is a guy who is putting his name and face on articles claiming that anyone who is opposed to women’s liberation is just a beta male whose ugly and mad he can’t get laid, and outright refuses, under any circumstance, to present something other than that, then you must assume this person is trapped in an eternal mommy psychological situation.

Another reader wrote:

Any argument that rests on “all you have to do to get a decent woman is out alpha and out status Kanye West and Brad Pitt” is so breathtakingly stupid that it actually kind of leaves you not knowing what to say. Also we “already are doing women rights and liberation so we just have to make it work” is self evidently liberal. You can’t want to go back to tradition, hierarchy or any kind of stable order while simultaneously doing women’s liberation from heiarchy and tradition. You just have to pick one. You literally can’t believe in hierarchy and order and women’s liberation. At best you want feminism but without the fruits and fall out of feminisms. This just isn’t serious.

And I replied again:

It’s not serious and not honest. They start out with this small dick shit, then move to “it’s too late, we have to be practical.” It’s more than moving the goal posts, it’s changing the entire foundation of the argument. It’s like “okay well, you called my bluff, so let me tell you what I actually believe.” And it’s like bro why were you lying about your beliefs on the internet?

It’s just a fallback to another meaningless fake line of reasoning that is also just a coverup for some kind of personal thing that these people have going on. It is a mommy defense system. I don’t know if these people even know how dishonest they are being, or if it is all subconscious, where they just know that they have to defend the supremacy of women, and it doesn’t really matter how they do it. But obviously, they can’t do it with some kind of well thought-through and reasonable point-by-point apologetic. No such thing exists.

Obviously, these people have no problem borrowing leftist arguments. But the leftists don’t have any arguments for feminism either. Leftists all talk about “equality,” while refusing to acknowledge that what they are endorsing is a ridiculous power imbalance, where women control all social situations and interpersonal dynamics, across the board.

Just to go back to basics here: equality cannot exist because it doesn’t exist. Women are not physically, emotionally, or intellectually equal to men. So to create that illusion, you necessarily have to create a massive power imbalance favoring women. That then becomes a runaway train, where you have the establishment claiming that women are capable of matching men in the military, but also if a woman goes to a man’s room and he tells her he’s going to have sex with her, she is too weak to scream or even tell him “no” because of his physical superiority.

In the latter situation, they will now start talking about how she can’t scream because of thousands of years of oppression or whatever – it just devolves into complete gibberish. Somehow, 3000 years ago, a woman was able to scream when a man tried to rape her (and was relieved of guilt of illicit sex if she did scream), but now, in a system where women are favored over men in every single area of society, a woman is too oppressed to scream.

Ultimately, this is the deal: these people hate nature because they hate God. Anyone who denies nature is not going to come up with a logical explanation, and will be forced to resort to nonsense, gibberish, and lies. I would even go so far as to say that any honest argument is about getting to the core of the natural order, which is synonymous with “God” and “Truth.”

Obviously, copying comments to the front page is a way for me to post something long on the front page without having to do any extra work, because it is Sunday and I want to go relax and drink wine on my porch. However, I do think these are important ideas, which deserve further exposure on the front page here. Also, I write a lot of long stuff on The Gamer Uprising that probably needs more exposure.

Because this issue of “right-wing male feminism” appears to be making a comeback in various quarters, it is something that I will probably be discussing more in the future. This will likely involve primarily going through and repeating a bunch of stuff I already wrote years ago, but I’m feeling up to doing that, and often the rewrites are better than the originals.

Next, I think it will be necessary to establish the fact that “feminism” is always “rule by women.” As stated, women are in control of all social situations and interpersonal dynamics in this society, and toxic femininity is at the core of the Western moral order. Explaining that we are all held hostage to a matriarchy, a brutal mommy tyranny, is a prerequisite to understanding just why feminism has been so destructive to civilization, and to understanding why nothing is going to be fixed in society until the patriarchy is reestablished.

To fix the problem of modernity, all of these Jewish revolutions must be overturned. We cannot pick and choose which ones we want to keep.

We have to go back to the way things were.

Actual quotes from this new CIA recruitment ad:

"I am a woman of color"

"I am a cisgender millennial"

"I have been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder"

"I am intersectional"

I think it's safe to say the contemporary American left has failed.pic.twitter.com/ruUzWSeIur

— Aisha Ahmad (@aishaismad) May 2, 2021

It is fitting and to be expected that the intelligence services would be filled with extreme “sexual minorities.”

For the most part, perverts are the only people you’re going to be able to get to work for this system.

RT:

A recruitment ad for the Central Intelligence Agency featuring a smorgasbord of woke buzzwords has been ruthlessly mocked on social media, with many accusing the spy agency of using ‘diversity’ to airbrush its shady dealings.

The CIA apparently wants Americans to know that despite its history of toppling democratically elected governments and operating torture ‘black sites’, it is still very much an equal opportunity employer. 

In a promotional video for the agency, an employee explains how she “used to struggle with imposter syndrome,” but later rejected the “patriarchal ideas” holding her back, realizing that she “earned her way in” to the agency.

“I am a woman of color. I am a mom. I am a cisgender Millenial who has been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. I am intersectional but my existence is not a box-checking exercise,” the woman states as ambient string music plays in the background, coupled with footage of her walking around her office and doing other inspiring things. 

Describing herself as a “proud first-generation Latina and officer at CIA,” the woman explains that she won’t apologize for “intoxicating” people with her “brilliance.” In the ad she is shown wearing a t-shirt with a female gender symbol containing a raised fist.

The video also shows some of the accolades that she has won for her excellent service at the agency, including the “Donald R. Cryer Award for Diversity and Inclusion.” Cryer played an integral role in spearheading the agency’s diversity programs, and was dubbed a CIA “trailblazer” by former director John Brennan in 2014.

I’ve only been intoxicated by a woman’s brilliance once, and thankfully, she was respectful enough to apologize for doing that to me.

Ask yourself: What has this globalist system provided?

Well, not much.

Mostly, this system has taken things away – freedom, order, personal identity.

It has provided:

• Welfare to brown people
• Unlimited drugs
• Unlimited sexual perversion

A few brown people might be competent, but if they are they likely would not want to serve this system, and would rather make money elsewhere.

Drug addicts are obviously useless.

Basically, sexual perverts are the only ones that might be capable of performing some function.